Thoughts of the Month – July 2013
Reply
Trayvon and Zimmerman
George Zimmerman followed Trayvon Martin of his own volition, even after being advised to back off by a 911 operator. I understand the acquittal due to “reasonable doubt”, but this case is not racially supercharged as the media likes to portray. It’s absurd really, since both men are a “minority” by definition and Zimmerman had a record of tutoring black children. I still hold some degree of skepticism regarding the various narratives and defendant accounts, but I see both sides of this story: One guy was simply patrolling his home while another was being trailed by an armed man. This confrontation may have even been between “innocents” as far as any of us knows, a situation that ended in the worst way due to the presence of a death-dealing weapon.
What I find interesting is how little we actually know about this case before formulating an opinion. The media is very responsible for not talking about the security of this community in which both men stayed, the eye-witness statements, or the full version of communications held between the Defendant and police (most are edited to portray a particular POV), as well as Trayvon texting to friends prior to his death.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=bF-Ax5E8EJc
http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/evidence-that-trayvon-martin-doubled-back
The second link is an informative location map with call times, while the first is the best video that I’ve found to reasonably discuss the occurrence. In it, Stefan Molyneux from “freedomainradio.com” reveals facts that are rarely discussed, including Trayvon’s large stature, combat training, and drug use, as well as Zimmerman’s domestic record and previous interactions with the police. The point isn’t to prove one of the men solely responsible, but rather to define the law and what preceded the actual trial. Based on this evidence, I do find reasonable doubt in not only the credibility of both parties but I truly understand how both must have felt during that fatal night.
[Quick Edit: As of December 2013, Zimmerman is back in the spotlight for waving a shotgun at his short term girlfriend to vacate his house. I’m having a harder time seeing the defendant’s side of the debacle….]
14 Days of EVE Online
EVE is a notoriously perilous universe where corporate espionage is intensified by real-world money scams and the innocent act of farming space rocks leads to “suicide ganking” as non-consensual PVP griefers unabashedly toy with the unwary, fully exploiting the game’s clone and security mechanics. The MMO’s developer, CCP, staunchly defends all duplicity and piracy falling under the open-ended software agreement, so no amount of clapping will restore the wings to billions of stolen ISK or real-world dollars. Knowing of its reputation and [entertaining] tales of dev-endorsed greed, I downloaded the trial and jotted notes during all 14 days of my experience within the villified EVE (Everyone Vs. Everyone).
Accidentally The Best
Some time ago, my husband wrote an article about the two-person, at home, chili cook-offs that we had between us. He named me the victor of both cook-offs. Although that was quite generous of him to do so (and it was a little flattering) it didn’t feel like a victory. It wasn’t because my chances of winning were 50-50, or because I cook often and can taste individual flavors, or even that I have an appreciation for cooking and eating.
Fact Disclaimers in News?
Call me an idiot [pause], but I took The New Yorker columnist Andy Borowitz literally when his article mentioned the mutual agreement to forever separate Putin and Obama. “It just CAN’T be true,” I thought, my discernible expectations for politicians disintegrating even further in a search for contrary evidence. It made sense in a senseless way, Obama being a silver-tongued upstart and Putin being the rugged, bear-wrestling, judo master who lost his smile in The Great Emotional Purge of ’52. Plus, “Barry O” only has a couple years left. It’s completely do-able.
Finally, after proof eluded me on the YouTubes, TYT, CNN, and other “legit” sources, I began investigating Borowitz, himself, suddenly realizing that the other blurbs in his repertoire tended to be more overt and indisputedly false. (The Wikipedia article labels him as one of them thar “comedians”.) Sucks that so many bloggers reference The New Yorker‘s satirist in their own writings, because it would be too easy for someone to quote multiple sources of this “story” and believe it as God-ordained fact.
Would it be too difficult for a “trustworthy” news source to require disclaimers at the end of each article? A single word like “PSYCHE!” or “GOTCHA!” would have saved me hours. (“The news, reshuffled.” is a terrible tag-line to indicate satire by the way.)
Screw your tongue-in-cheek-elitist-snobbery you long-necked, monacled asshole. I shouldn’t have to perform a full background check on your employees. What’s more, [surprisingly?] I even like bitter political humor…. but label it better for fackt’s sake!
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2012/07/shocker-the-new-yorker-acquires-the-borowitz-report.html (Borowitz agrees that he just doesn’t belong.)